Abstract

A pop-in (a brittle crack arrest phenomenon) sometimes occurs in a three-point bending fracture toughness test of a welded joint. The current standards may consider a pop-in to be a significant fracture and underestimate fracture toughness. In this case, the allowable defect size in a welded structure becomes very small, and many defects need to be repaired, resulting in high maintenance costs. Therefore, a reasonable acceptance judgment method for the pop-in is practically important. Herein we proposed an assessment method to determine whether or not it is a significantly detrimental pop-in that affects the integrity of a structure. The method was designed based on the cohesive zone model and validated on its ability to reproduce experimental results. The difference in loading modes between bending during the fracture toughness test and tension of the structure and in the crack initiation conditions for both load modes was determined by comparing the Weibull stress, which is a characteristic of the material. All the main fracture surfaces of the numerical model were cohesive and had conservatively low toughness. No pop-in occurred under tensile loading under a Weibull stress condition of 13.1 % load drop, whereas a pop-in occurred under bending loading. However, under a load drop of 10.6 %, a pop-in occurred even under tensile loading. Therefore, it was shown that the load drop could be relaxed to 10 % or more, although the load drop is considered insignificant at 5 % or more according to the current standards.

References

1.
Standard Test Method for Linear-Elastic Plane-Strain Fracture Toughness KIc of Metallic Materials
, ASTM E399-17(2017) (
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
, approved November 15,
2017
), https://doi.org/10.1520/E0399-17
2.
Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fracture Toughness
, ASTM E1820(2009) (
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
, approved November 1,
2009
), https://doi.org/10.1520/E1820-09
3.
Standard Test Method for Determination of Reference Temperature, To′, for Ferritic Steels in the Transition Range
, ASTM E1921(2005) (
West Conshohocken, PA
:
ASTM International
, approved January 1,
2005
), https://doi.org/10.1520/E1921-05
4.
Metallic Materials–Unified Method of Test for the Determination of Quasistatic Fracture
Toughness (Withdrawn), ISO 12135(2016) (Geneva, Switzerland:
International Organization for Standardization
, approved November 15,
2016
).
5.
Metallic Materials–Method of Test for the Determination of Quasistatic Fracture Toughness of Welds
, ISO 15653(2018) (Geneva, Switzerland:
International Organization for Standardization
, approved January 31,
2018
).
6.
Fracture Mechanics Toughness Tests–Part 1: Method for the Determination of KIc, Critical CTOD and Critical J Values of Metallic Materials
(Superseded), BS 7448-1(1991) (London:
British Standards Institution
, approved December 20,
1991
).
7.
Fracture Mechanics Toughness Tests–Part 2: Method for the Determination of KIc, Critical CTOD and Critical J Values of Welds in Metallic Materials
(Superseded), BS 7448-2(1997) (London:
British Standards Institution
, approved August 15,
1997
).
8.
Standard Test Method for Crack-Tip Opening Displacement (CTOD) Fracture Toughness Measurement
, WES 1108(2016) (Tokyo, Japan:
The Japan Welding Engineering Society
, approved January 1,
2016
).
9.
Guideline for Crack-Tip Opening Displacement (CTOD) Fracture Toughness Test Method of Weld Heat-Affected Zone
, WES 1109(1995) (Tokyo, Japan:
The Japan Welding Engineering Society
, approved April 1,
1995
).
10.
Dawes
M. G.
, “
Quantifying Pop-In Severity in Fracture Toughness Tests
,”
Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures
14
, no. 
10
(October
1991
):
1007
1014
, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2695.1991.tb00009.x
11.
Miyata
T.
, “
Some Comments on the Evaluation of Toughness for Low and Medium Strength Steels
” (in Japanese),
Transactions of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers Series A
48
, no. 
426
(February
1982
):
125
131
, https://doi.org/10.1299/kikaia.48.125
12.
Berejnoi
C.
,
Perez Ipiña
J. E.
, and
Llorentec
C. L.
, “
Reproducibility of Pop-Ins in Laboratory Testing of Welded Joints
,”
Materials Research
3
, no. 
4
(October
2000
):
139
146
, https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-14392000000400008
13.
Camacho
G. T.
and
Ortiz
M.
, “
Computational Modelling of Impact Damage in Brittle Materials
,”
International Journal of Solids and Structures
33
, nos.
20–22
(August
1996
):
2899
2938
, https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7683(95)00255-3
14.
Kanna
S.
,
Yamashita
Y.
,
Kawabata
T.
,
Tagawa
T.
,
Imai
Y.
,
Mikami
Y.
,
Kitano
H.
, et al., “
Assessment of Finite Element Analyses of Load Mode (Bending vs. Tension) Effects for Mitigation of Judgment on Pop-Ins Caused by Splits
,”
Engineering Fracture Mechanics
205
(January
2019
):
28
39
, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.10.027
15.
Metallic Materials−Tensile Testing−Method of Test at Room Temperature (in Japanese)
, JIS Z 2241(2011) (Tokyo, Japan:
Japanese Standards Association
, approved February 21,
2011
).
16.
Dassault Systems
Abaqus Analysis User’s Guide
(Paris:
Dassault Systems
,
2015
).
17.
Dassault Systems
Abaqus/Standard, Version 6.14-1
(Paris:
Dassault Systems
,
2014
).
18.
Dassault Systems
Abaqus/Explicit, Version 6.14-1
(Paris:
Dassault Systems
,
2014
).
19.
Nakanishi
D.
,
Kawabata
T.
, and
Aihara
S.
, “
An Observation of Brittle Crack Propagation in Coarse Grained 3% Silicon Steel
,”
Procedia Structural Integrity
2
(June
2016
):
493
500
, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2016.06.064
20.
Cowper
G. R.
and
Symonds
P. S.
,
Strain-Hardening and Strain-Rate Effects in the Impact Loading of Cantilever Beams, Technical Report 28
(Providence, RI:
Brown University, Division of Applied Mathematics
,
1957
).
21.
Kawabata
T.
,
Inami
A.
, and
Aihara
S.
, “
Numerical Model of Brittle Crack Propagation Considering Fracture Surface Energy on High Tensile Strength Steel
” (in Japanese),
Journal of the Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers
16
(December
2012
):
77
87
, https://doi.org/10.2534/jjasnaoe.16.77
22.
Freund
L. B.
,
The Mechanics of Dynamic Fracture, AD-A243 779
(
Providence, RI
:
Brown University, Division of Engineering
,
1986
).
23.
Beremin
F. M.
,
Pineau
A.
,
Mudry
F.
,
Devaux
J.-C.
,
D’Escatha
Y.
, and
Ledermann
P.
, “
A Local Criterion for Cleavage Fracture of a Nuclear Pressure Vessel Steel
,”
Metallurgical Transactions A
14
(November
1983
):
2277
2287
, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02663302
24.
Minami
F.
, “
Fracture Assessment Method Using the Weibull Stress−Part I
” (in Japanese),
Journal of the Japan Welding Society
75
, no. 
5
(
2006
):
416
446
, https://doi.org/10.2207/jjws.75.416
25.
Elices
M.
,
Guinea
G. V.
,
Gómez
J.
, and
Planas
J.
, “
The Cohesive Zone Model: Advantages, Limitations and Challenges
,”
Engineering Fracture Mechanics
69
, no. 
2
(January
2002
):
137
163
, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(01)00083-2
26.
McCabe
D. E.
,
Evaluation of Crack Pop-Ins and the Determination of Their Relevance to Design Considerations, Report NUREG/CR-5952 (ORNL/TM-12247)
(Oak Ridge, TN:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
,
1993
).
27.
Suzuki
S.
,
Bessyo
K.
,
Toyoda
M.
, and
Minami
F.
, “
Influence of Martensitic Islands on Fracture Behaviour of Multipass Weld HAZ
,”
Quarterly Journal of the Japan Welding Society
13
, no. 
2
(May
1995
):
293
301
, https://doi.org/10.2207/qjjws.13.293
28.
Willoughby
A. A.
, “
Significance of Pop-In Fracture Toughness Testing
,”
International Journal of Fracture
30
(January
1986
):
R3
R6
, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00034581
29.
Arimochi
K.
and
Isaka
K.
,
A Study on Pop-In Phenomenon in CTOD Test for Weldment and Proposal of Assessment Method for Significance of Pop-In, IIW Doc.X-1118-86
(
Paris
:
International Institute of Welding
,
1986
).
30.
Wiesner
C. S.
,
Crack Arrest Concepts for Failure Prevention and Life Extension
(
Cambridge, UK
:
Abington Publishing
,
1996
).
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.